Floor Statements

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, following my remarks and those of the Republican leader, the Senate will resume consideration of the motion to proceed to Calendar No. 265, S. 1845, the unemployment insurance extension.

I ask unanimous consent that the leader time that I use and that of Senator McConnell not count against the half hour that the proponents and opponents of this legislation have to speak, 15 minutes on each side.

The vote will drag a little bit but not very much. My remarks are fairly short.

The Senate will recess from 12:30 p.m. to 2:15 p.m. to allow for weekly caucus meetings.

Over the last 45 months America's private sector has done OK--not great but done pretty well. Eight million jobs have been created. The stock market is booming and even the housing market is starting to show signs of life.

A number of States were hit so hard with the decline of the housing market. Nevada was hit the hardest, and California, Florida, Michigan-- a number of States--were hit very hard. But even in those States the housing market is turning around a little bit--not enough but turning around. It is clear that the economy is picking up steam--not enough steam but picking up steam.

But for far too many Americans these bright headlines that I have just announced touting good economic news don't match the darker reality of their lives. They sit at the kitchen table--if they are lucky to have a kitchen table--and they are juggling their bills.

It was brought to my attention on the way to work this morning about how hard it is for so many people. On Constitution Avenue, as we were waiting for a light, I could see off to the left a news camera and a reporter trying to wake up somebody who had been spending the night on the pavement--not on the grates where the heat comes up. They kept pushing and pushing. I could see they were talking to him. He or she didn't come out of that bundle of material on that sidewalk.

I don't know if this man is one of the long-term unemployed. I don't know. But there are lots of people who are in desperate shape. They may not be sleeping on a sidewalk on Constitution Avenue 14 blocks from the White House, but there are people in America who are desperate for help.

There are 1.3 million people who have already lost their unemployment insurance benefits. This is not good for the country. We are told by economists that for every $1 we spend on unemployment benefits it gets $1.50 back to us just like that. So we have to start understanding that we have a country where not everyone is benefiting from what is going on with these headlines I just reported.

Over the last 30 years the income and wealth of the top 1 percent has increased 300 percent. The middle class dropped almost 10 percent. Think about it, 300 percent; the middle class about a 10-percent drop.

I haven't even mentioned the poor. They have been hit harder than anyone else. When I say this, it is true. The rich are getting a lot richer and the poor are getting poorer. The middle class is being squeezed.

I have nothing against people of wealth. It is great we live in a country where people can make a lot of money, but we have to understand there are people who are really hurting. For those who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own--and millions of them have struggled for months to find new work--a booming stock market of increasing corporate profits is of little comfort to them.

Fortunately, Americans looking for work have been able to rely on unemployment insurance to get them through the tough times. But for 1.3 million people, no deal; 20,000 are veterans returning from wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

At the end of last year, only a few days ago, Congress failed to extend unemployment emergency insurance for Americans who have been looking for work for more than 6 months. We have never in the history of our country had long-term unemployment such as today--never in the history of our Republic. Yet we are turning 1.3 million people away. Are they going to be the next ones sleeping on some street--wherever they come from--trying to stay warm?

For many Americans these benefits make the difference between being able to live a decent life--not a good life, a decent life--and going hungry or becoming homeless.

Let us go back to 2012. In 2012 unemployment insurance helped 2.5 million people, including 600,000 children, from going into the rolls of poverty. We don't have all the results from last year. These families live in red States, blue States, Republicans, Democrats, or Independents. We shouldn't turn our backs on them.

In the past, we have worked together. Did we complain when President Bush came to us? Unemployment was nowhere near where it is now. There were enough long-term unemployed, and we automatically together extended those benefits. Not today. We are not doing it because we can't get the Republicans to help us. We have reached out the hand to hardworking Americans struggling to get by.

I would hope we can get a few Republicans to join Dean Heller of Nevada, a conservative Senator. Join with Dean Heller, a junior Senator from Nevada, and help get this legislation passed.

In the latest round of emergency assistance, George Bush was the person who signed that bill. At the time the unemployment rate was about 5.5 percent. Today in Nevada and Rhode Island--the State of Senator Jack Reed, who will speak--it is about 9 percent.

The long-term unemployment rate today is more than double what it was at the time that we let emergency job assistance expire. Senator Heller understands. I am troubled that most of Senator Heller's Republican colleagues, according to what we are hearing in the press, callously turned their backs on the long-term unemployed.

I am saddened. I hope that we can get them to move over and help us to help these people who need it so very much. Failing to restore emergency assistance would not only be a crushing blow to the long-term unemployed, it would be a blow to our economy.

Americans use their unemployment benefits to buy food and fuel at local gas stations, to pay their landlords or to purchase for a child a winter coat. That is why for every dollar we spend on unemployment benefits, I repeat, the economy grows by $1.50. This investment in our fellow Americans is one of the most effective ways to spark and sustain an economic recovery.

Last night the senior Senator from Texas, a Republican, asked that we delay this vote until today. I was pleased to do that. He called this a serious issue, and he is very correct. The senior Senator from Texas is correct. This is a serious issue. It is as serious to people outside Nevada as it is to those people from Nevada who have been out of work for so long. People from Nevada have written and called my office, calling and begging for a little more time.

For every job that is available, there are three that are unemployed in America. We Democrats stand united in support of this extension. Republicans need to take this seriously as well as we.

I hope Republicans remember that during hard times, that during times of high unemployment--regardless of who is in the White House or who led this Chamber--Congress is always willing to put politics aside and put American families first.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Reserving the right to object--and I appreciate how candid my Republican counterpart is and I say that seriously--I do speak with some, or I try, though I am not real good at speaking with a lot of fervor, as everyone knows--but I feel very strongly about this issue. For people who are unemployed and can't find a job, it is a tough deal. I have, fortunately, always had a job. I can't say the same for my family, especially my dad. So I do speak with as much fervor as I am capable on this issue.

The reason I mention I am glad my friend is being so candid is-- listen to this--no one can in any way dispute my facts. For every $1 spent, we get $1.50 back. That doesn't add to the deficit. So as I see this picture from the consent request, I am seeing that we are going to take away ObamaCare, which 9 million new people have and are signing up at the rate of thousands every day. We are going to take away their benefits, in some form or fashion, and we are going to trump the bipartisan agreement we have with Mikulski and Rogers. They are coming up with an omnibus bill. I know my friend has already stated he initially was against the budget deal, but I would bet that is addressed in this deal Mikulski and Rogers will come up with--this helping of veterans.

So this is a guise to obstruct, as has been happening during the 5 years President Obama has been President of the United States, and I object with as much fervor as I can.

I note the absence of a quorum.

I announce that the Senator from Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin), the Senator from Alaska (Mr. Begich), the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Durbin), the Senator from Iowa (Mr. Harkin), the Senator from North Dakota (Ms. Heitkamp), the Senator from Maine (Mr. King), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the Senator from New Hampshire (Mrs. Shaheen) and the Senator from Massachusetts (Ms. Warren) are necessarily absent.

I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin), the Senator from Alaska (Mr. Begich), the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Durbin), the Senator from Iowa (Mr. Harkin), the Senator from North Dakota (Ms. Heitkamp), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the Senator from New Hampshire (Mrs. Shaheen) and the Senator from Massachusetts (Ms. Warren) would each vote ``yea.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the next vote be 10 minutes in duration, the mandatory quorum under rule XXII be waived, and there be 2 minutes equally divided prior to the vote on the motion to proceed to S. 1845.

I ask unanimous consent that the vote be scheduled tomorrow at 10 a.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period of morning business, with Senators allowed to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

I welcome back the President pro tempore and the entire staff and look forward to our continuing work together over the next 2 weeks and to see what happens after that.

Following my remarks and those of the Republican leader, the Senate will resume the motion to proceed to Calendar No. 265, S. 1845, the unemployment insurance extension.

At 3 p.m. the Senate will proceed to executive session to consider the nomination of Janet Yellen to be Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, postcloture. The time until 5:30 p.m. will be equally divided and controlled.

There will be two rollcall votes at 5:30 p.m., first on confirmation of the Yellen nomination and second on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to the unemployment insurance legislation.

There could be a series of votes after that dealing with other nominations. We will keep everyone advised as to what is going on.

I am told that H.R. 2019 is at the desk and due for a second reading.

I object to any further proceedings at this time.

I am optimistic, cautiously optimistic, that the new year will bring a renewed spirit of cooperation to this Chamber. It is very badly needed.

Last year the Senate passed a number of momentous pieces of legislation, including comprehensive immigration, a budget agreement, and a bill to prevent workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation.

There is so much more that needs to be done and there is so much left undone. There has been never-ending obstruction during the entire 5 years that President Obama has been President of the United States.

Setting that aside for a brief moment, today we will address two pressing matters held over from last year: the nomination of Janet Yellen to be head of the Federal Reserve, and extension of unemployment benefits for 1.3 million Americans still struggling to find work. Instead of celebrating the beginning of the New Year on January 1, more than 1 million Americans, including 20,000 veterans and about 20,000 Nevadans, were left wondering how they would feed their families and make their mortgage payments while they continue to look for jobs. Frankly, most of these people aren't making mortgage payments; they are renting. They are trying to make ends meet from month to month.

Today there is only one job opening for every three people searching. We have never had so many unemployed for such a long period of time.

The long-term unemployment rate is twice as high as it was any other time we have allowed emergency unemployment benefits to end. It will be catastrophic for this to happen for men and women, boys and girls.

What is more, failing to extend unemployment insurance won't only be a hardship for hard-working Americans, it will be a drag on our economy. Allowing this important lifeline to lapse will cost 240,000 jobs.

These people who are drawing unemployment benefits are just getting by. They have to buy groceries, maybe at 7-Eleven. Sometimes they go to a regular store. They have to buy gas for their vehicles. They have to buy bus tickets to get across town to look for a job. A multitude of other things they need are going to be eliminated. That will cost almost a quarter of a million jobs.

By contrast, helping Americans while they search for full-time unemployment is one of the most efficient ways to support economic growth. Each dollar we spend on unemployment insurance benefits increases the gross domestic product by $1.50. According to leading economists--including Mark Zandi, John McCain's chief economic adviser when he ran for President--they agree that every dollar we spend brings back $1.50 to our gross domestic product.

In 2012 alone, 500,000 children were kept out of poverty by unemployment benefits. That is one reason it is outrageous that Congress allowed this program--which helps tens of millions of American families with millions of children get by each year--to lapse in December is unconscionable. Today the Senate has a chance to correct this terrible omission.

Just before Christmas my colleague from Nevada, a Republican, Dean Heller, joined with the senior Senator from Rhode Island, Jack Reed, a Democrat, to propose an extension of unemployment insurance for 1.3 million Americans who lost benefits this past week. I commend these two Senators for their compassionate stance on this issue. The Senate will vote on moving forward on this Reed-Heller bill this evening. I hope a few reasonable and empathetic Republicans will join my colleague from Nevada Mr. Heller and help us advance this bill today.

Passing this measure is one of the best things we can do for our economy, and it is cost-effective. It is cost-effective in so many different ways, but it is cost-effective to immediately address the worst consequences of growing income inequality in this Nation.

Another way to raise millions of Americans out of poverty is to increase the minimum wage and make it a living wage. People can work two jobs, work so hard--80 hours a week, and some are working over 100 hours a week--just to make ends meet. They work minimum-wage jobs. Minimum-wage jobs are not living-wage jobs. We are seeing this change all over the country. In the State of Washington, there is one community that has raised it to $15 an hour.

We have to do more to help people who are willing to work. We want them to make a living wage. The reason that is so very important is that it is believed--it is not believed, polling will indicate this-- that two-thirds of small businesses want the minimum wage to be increased. Why? Because it helps them grow their businesses.

When a mother or a father working two or three jobs still can't afford groceries and rent the same month, it is a sign that something is wrong in this country.

Last year the top 1 percent, the very rich, took home so much money that it broke a 1928 record percentagewise. In the last 30 years the income of the top 1 percent has increased by 300 percent 3 times. But what has happened in that same 30 years to middle-income Americans and the middle class? Their income has dropped by 10 percent--300 percent minus 10 percent. That is not good.

Wages for middle-class families have actually fallen, as I have indicated. They have fallen by almost 10 percent while the cost of housing, food, and gas has gone up. The rich keep getting richer, the poor keep getting poorer, and the middle class is under siege.

This country can't afford to allow the gap between the fabulously wealthy and those who are barely getting by--to keep their incomes going up, the middle class going down, and the poor getting poorer. That is why Democrats this year will renew our efforts to address poverty and economic disparities.

I congratulate wealthy Americans on their good fortune. I think it is tremendous that we are a country of opportunity where people could make money. But we also believe it is time for the middle class to share in the success of economic recovery.

(Mr. Murphy assumed the Chair.)

The Presiding Officer has spent a great deal of time on the Senate floor trying to bring to the attention of the American people what is going on in the Republican-dominated Congress. The Presiding Officer hasn't come to the floor and berated Republicans about the fact that 90 percent of the American people believe that if a person has mental disabilities, severe mental problems or is a criminal, that they shouldn't be able to buy a gun without a background check. Ninety percent of the American people agree with the Presiding Officer.

Members of Congress, or Republicans, disagree, but it is the same on the other two issues I have talked about--minimum wage. The vast majority of Americans agree with this, Democrats, Independents, and even Republicans. Unemployment insurance is the same. But in Congress, they disagree with the American people as it relates to background checks. They disagree with the American people as it relates to minimum wage. They disagree with the American people as it relates to the unemployment insurance extension.

They cannot get off the tune they have been singing for such a long time: ObamaCare, ObamaCare, ObamaCare. As we speak, the American people are so much better off because of ObamaCare. If they have a disability, they cannot be denied health insurance coverage. Children stay on their parents' insurance until they are 26. Seniors get wellness checks, Pap smears, mammograms. Many people could never afford that. The doughnut hole for prescription drugs is being closed. Your insurance can't be terminated because someone is hurt and the bill is big. They can't do that anymore. But Republicans can't get off trying to repeal ObamaCare.

ObamaCare is here to stay. As we speak, there are 9 million people who have insurance who didn't have it before. We have about 2.5 million people who have gotten insurance on the Web, including the 14 exchanges of various States, including Nevada.

We have 3 million people who have insurance now because they are on their parents' insurance and can stay there until they are 26. Three million Americans have that because of ObamaCare, and there are about 3 million Americans who are so poor they now qualify for Medicaid. That is 9 million people who didn't have insurance before.

But what is the first thing the House of Representatives is doing? They are going to vote on ObamaCare. They voted to repeal it at least 45 times, which didn't work. We now have one Senator from Wisconsin who is filing a lawsuit today, and he is boasting about this lawsuit: It is a great deal. It would take away the health insurance of the people working in this body--all of these people, plus all of our staffs who aren't here in this building.

Here is what longtime Republican House Member Jim Sensenbrenner from Wisconsin--with whom I and the Presiding Officer had the good fortune to serve in the House of Representatives--said:

``Senator Johnson's lawsuit is an unfortunate political

stunt. I am committed to repealing ObamaCare, but the

employer contribution he's attacking is nothing more than a

standard benefit that most private and all federal employees

receive--including the President, Sensenbrenner said.

``uccess in the suit will mean that Congress will lose some

of its best staff and will be staffed primarily by recent

college graduates who are still on their parents'

insurance.''

Sensenbrenner is a longtime House Member and former

chairman of the Judiciary Committee. He is expressing

concerns that were shared publicly and privately by many

lawmakers and senior aides about the possible ``brain drain''

from taking away the employer contribution. Several

Republicans, led by Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana, have

floated legislative proposals that would accomplish the same

goal as the Johnson lawsuit.

Sensenbrenner went on to say:

``Senator Johnson should spend his time legislating rather

than litigating as our country is facing big problems that

must be addressed by Congress--not the courts. All

Republicans want to repeal ObamaCare, but this politically

motivated lawsuit only takes public attention away from how

bad all of ObamaCare really is and focuses it on a trivial

issue. Fortunately, Senator Johnson's suit is likely

frivolous and will not achieve the result he's seeking.''

As I stated in my remarks today, we have been able to get a few things done, but we have been unable to get so many important things done because the goal for the last 5 years by the Republicans in the Congress--not Republicans in the country but Republicans in the Congress--has been to do everything they could to make President Obama look bad. Remember, my counterpart said his No. 1 goal in the last Congress was to do everything he could to defeat Obama from being reelected. Well, he was elected overwhelmingly, so that was a futile effort.

We need to get back to working together, as we have always done-- until this effort which has been made to disparage and damage in any way they can the President of the United States and, in the process, our country.

Would my friend yield for a question?

Through the Chair to my friend, the President pro tempore of the Senate, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, we hear the Republicans talking that they want to do everything they can to reduce the debt. I ask my friend, twofold: No. 1, the bible for how to reduce the debt was Bowles-Simpson. They set a goal of $4 trillion. Right now we are almost at $3 trillion. We have cut spending to reduce the debt by almost $3 trillion.

Does my friend acknowledge that, by passing the bill reported out of the Judiciary Committee, it would reduce the debt by another $1 trillion; we would basically reach the goal of Bowles-Simpson if they would just pass immigration reform?

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Krishna Patel, a detailee on Senator Tim Johnson's banking committee staff, be granted floor privileges for the duration of today's session.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that, as in executive session, the nomination of Rhea Sun Suh, of Colorado, to be Assistant Secretary of Fish and Wildlife, sent to the Senate by the President, be referred jointly to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and the Committee on Environment and Public Works.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that, as in executive session, the nomination of Arun MadhaAn Kumar, of California, to be Assistant Secretary of Commerce and Director General of the United States and Foreign Commercial Service, sent to the Senate by the President, be referred jointly to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10 a.m. on Tuesday, January 7, 2014; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; that following any leader remarks, the Senate resume consideration of the motion to proceed to S. 1845, the unemployment insurance extension, and the time until 10:30 be equally divided and controlled in the usual form; that at 10:30 the Senate vote on the motion to proceed to the bill; that the Senate recess from 12:30 to 2:15 to allow for our weekly caucus meetings.

The first vote will be at 10:30 a.m.